JNM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Buck, A. K.
Right arrow Articles by Reske, S. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Buck, A. K.
Right arrow Articles by Reske, S. N.
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Vol. 45 No. 3 461-463
© 2004 by Society of Nuclear Medicine


Basic Science Investigations

Cellular Origin and Molecular Mechanisms of 18F-FDG Uptake: Is There a Contribution of the Endothelium?

Andreas K. Buck, MD and Sven N. Reske, MD

University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany

The glucose analog 18F-FDG is a surrogate marker for glucose metabolism and the most commonly used radiopharmaceutical for PET. The number of clinical applications for 18F-FDG and PET continues to increase, especially in the field of oncology. It has been known for many years that increased glycolysis is a distinctive feature of malignant tumors compared with normal tissues (1). Di Chiro et al. first demonstrated a more intense accumulation of 18F-FDG in human brain tumors than in surrounding brain (2). The concept of preferential 18F-FDG uptake in malignant tumors was rapidly extended to many other cancers. However, the underlying mechanism of 18F-FDG uptake in various tissues is not completely understood. Further evidence of the cellular origin and molecular mechanisms of 18F-FDG uptake is reported by Maschauer et al. in this issue of The Journal of Nuclear Medicine (3).

These authors (3) evaluated the uptake of 18F-FDG in human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) serving as a model of vascular endothelium. In cell culture, they report similar uptake values as compared with tumor cells and a higher 18F-FDG uptake as compared with human macrophages. Therefore, they suggest a contribution of the endothelium to 18F-FDG uptake patterns observed in neoplastic and vascularized lesions. They further demonstrate a modulation of 18F-FDG uptake under certain experimental conditions. Though increased glucose and concomitantly 18F-FDG consumption after glucose deprivation has been shown before (4), an interesting finding is the increased 18F-FDG uptake after incubation of HUVECs with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). VEGF is an endothelial cytokine that stimulates proliferation and migration of vascularly derived endothelial cells and is overexpressed in a variety of tumors, including renal, breast, ovary, and colon cancer. Consecutively, an upregulation of respective receptors VEGF-R1 and VEGF-R2 can be found in tumor-derived endothelium. After adding VEGF to the medium, the authors describe an 82% increase of 18F-FDG uptake in HUVECs compared with untreated controls. According to these findings, VEGF-stimulated endothelial cells may contribute to total 18F-FDG uptake.

However, caution is necessary when applying the results to physiologic conditions. The main obstacle of the study is the cell type examined. HUVECs can hardly be used to estimate the contribution of the endothelium to 18F-FDG uptake patterns in vivo. Furthermore, the necessity to perform uptake studies at 4°C makes it difficult to relate the findings to human disease. Therefore, the metabolism of 18F-FDG in vascular endothelium must be examined in further studies. So far, only a limited number of models are available to study the metabolism of vascular endothelium or metabolic alterations during angiogenesis. A suitable model for this application might be the rabbit eye model in which tumors are implanted in the anterior eye chamber (5). Subsequently, tumor growth and neoangiogenesis can be evaluated in the rabbit cornea. Another approach is the use of tumor xenotransplant models using immunodeficient mice (6).

The idea of endothelial cells contributing to 18F-FDG uptake patterns in tumors as well as vascularized lesions is innovative. Previous in vitro studies indicated that 18F-FDG uptake is determined mainly by the number of viable tumor cells (7). Whereas necrotic or fibrotic tissue may reduce tracer uptake, the presence of inflammatory cells potentially results in an increased 18F-FDG accumulation (8,9). Animal studies have shown that inflammatory cells significantly contribute to 18F-FDG uptake in tumors. Using a tumor mouse model, Kubota et al. reported that 29% of 18F-FDG uptake was related to nontumoral tissue (10). Recent clinical investigations indicate that 18F-FDG uptake in tumors does not precisely reflect the number of viable tumor cells (1113).

The detailed molecular mechanism of 18F-FDG accumulation within cells has been investigated in vitro and in vivo. 18F-FDG enters the cell by the same membrane transport mechanism as glucose. After penetration of the cellular membrane via glucose transporters, both 18F-FDG and glucose are phosphorylated by hexokinase. Unlike glucose-6-phosphate, 18F-FDG-6-phosphate is not a substrate of glucose-6-phosphate isomerase and does not undergo further metabolism in the glucose pathway. 18F-FDG is therefore trapped within cells. Three phenomena have been recognized to cause increased glucose utilization in tumor cells: overexpression of membrane glucose transporters, especially Glut-1 and Glut-3 (14,15); increased hexokinase activity (16); and decreased levels of glucose-6-phosphatase (17). In tumors with higher activity of glucose-6-phosphatase, a lower 18F-FDG uptake may occur—for example, in hepatocellular carcinoma (18). It remains to be determined which of those steps is rate limiting in the process of 18F-FDG uptake in cancer cells. The overexpression of Glut-1 in nearly all human cancers has lead to the speculation that glucose metabolism is predominantly regulated by glucose transporters. However, it was demonstrated recently that a tumor cell line with low expression of Glut-1 accumulated 18F-FDG more rapidly than a cell line with high expression (19). In a clinical study, Torizuka et al. have shown by kinetic modeling that the phosphorylation step appears to be rate determining in the uptake of 18F-FDG in breast but not in lung cancer (20). Therefore, mechanisms regulating 18F-FDG uptake may vary among cancers derived from different tissues.

Glut-1 expression has also been found in vascular endothelial cells. Exposure of endothelial cells to hypoxia results in a 9-fold upregulation of Glut-1 messenger RNA (mRNA) expression and a 2- to 3-fold increase of 2-deoxyglucose influx, suggesting an analogous uptake mechanism of 18F-FDG (21). There are only limited studies on the effects of cytokines on glucose transport in endothelial cells. However, a VEGF-mediated increase of glucose transport was also demonstrated by Pan et al., who exposed bovine aortic endothelial cells to VEGF and detected an increased glucose transport and elevated Glut-1 mRNA levels (22).

Overxpression of VEGF and other stress-related proteins or signaling molecules, such as interleukin-1, transforming growth factor-{alpha} (TNF-{alpha}), or transforming growth factor-ß (TGF-ß), have also been observed in hypoxic tissue derived from tumors. Recently, it was suggested that hypoxia increases the uptake of 18F-FDG through activation of the glycolytic pathway. After exposing breast cancer cells to a hypoxic atmosphere, Clavo et al. detected a significant increase of 18F-FDG uptake (23). Burgman et al. reported that Glut-1 receptors are upregulated 2-fold but not overexpressed in hypoxic tumor cells (24). Furthermore, a concomitant overexpression of VEGF and Glut-1 was reported in hypoxic lung cancer xenografts (25). Therefore, a connection of hypoxia and induction of glycolysis via VEGF-induced Glut-1 expression seems feasible.

Under physiologic conditions, cell turnover in the endothelium is a rare event and the energy demand is low. At a specific time point, only 1 of 100,000 endothelial cells passes through the cell cycle (26). Solitary tumors can achieve a size of >1–2 mm only if sufficient oxygen and blood supply are provided by newly formed blood vessels. This angiogenic switch is also the basis for invasive growth of carcinomas and metastasis (26). Besides VEGF, neoangiogenesis and concomitant proliferation of endothelial cells are mediated by several growth factors, such as fibroblast growth factors, platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), TGF-{alpha}, and vascular cell adhesion molecules (e.g., VCAM-1). A correlation between 18F-FDG uptake and these parameters may exist but has not been investigated so far.

The hypothesis of endothelial cell 18F-FDG accumulation is further supported by 2 clinical studies (12,13) that report a significant correlation of microvessel density and tumor 18F-FDG uptake in 70 and 55 patients with breast cancer, respectively. Microvessel density turned out to be an indicator of higher malignancy (27) and an independent predictor of prognosis—for example, in breast cancer and melanoma (28,29). Vascular endothelium may promote 18F-FDG uptake not exclusively by enhanced delivery of 18F-FDG to the tumor cells. A significant 18F-FDG uptake in vascular endothelial cells may also contribute to overall 18F-FDG uptake.

In summary, the definite mechanism for 18F-FDG uptake patterns in tumors remains to be determined. Various cellular components and a variety of molecular mechanisms contribute to respective 18F-FDG uptake. The most important factors comprise expression of Glut-1 and hexokinase, the number of viable tumor cells, microvessel density, tumor cell proliferation, and the presence of inflammatory cells. The study of Maschauer et al. (3) gives further evidence that VEGF-stimulated endothelium may contribute to 18F-FDG uptake in a lesion. Additional studies using models especially designed for the evaluation of angiogenesis are necessary to further elucidate the relevance of the endothelium to 18F-FDG uptake patterns.


    FOOTNOTES
 
Received Nov. 11, 2003; revision accepted Dec. 12, 2003.

For correspondence or reprints contact: Andreas K. Buck, MD, University of Ulm, Robert-Koch-Strassse 8, D-89081 Ulm, Germany.

E-mail: andreas.buck{at}medizin.uni-


    REFERENCES
 TOP
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Warburg O, Posener K, Negelein E. The metabolism of cancer cells. Biochem Zeitschr. 1924;152:129–169.
  2. Di Chiro G, DeLaPaz RL, Brooks RA, et al. Glucose utilization of cerebral gliomas measured by [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography. Neurology. 1982;32:1323–1329.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Maschauer S, Prante O, Hoffmann M, Deichen JT, Kuwert T. Characterization of 18F-FDG uptake in human endothelial cells in vitro. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:455–460.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Gaposchkin CG, Garcia-Diaz JF. Modulation of cultured brain, adrenal, and aortic endothelial cell glucose transport. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1996;1285:255–266.[Medline]
  5. Gimbrone MA Jr, Cotran RS, Leapman SB, Folkman J. Tumor growth and neovascularization: an experimental model using the rabbit cornea. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1974;52:413–427.
  6. Schmitt O, Schubert C, Feyerabend T, Hellwig-Burgel T, Weiss C, Kuhnel W. Preferential topography of proteins regulating vascularization and apoptosis in a MX1 xenotransplant after treatment with hypoxia, hyperthermia, ifosfamide, and irradiation. Am J Clin Oncol. 2002;25:325–336.[Medline]
  7. Higashi K, Clavo AC, Wahl RL. Does FDG uptake measure proliferative activity of human cancer cells? In vitro comparison with DNA flow cytometry and tritiated thymidine uptake. J Nucl Med. 1993;34:414–419.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Kubota K, Matsuzawa T, Fujiwara T, et al. Differential diagnosis of lung tumor with positron emission tomography: a prospective study. J Nucl Med. 1990;31:1927–1932.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Brown RS, Leung JY, Fisher SJ, Frey KA, Ethier SP, Wahl RL. Intratumoral distribution of tritiated fluorodeoxyglucose in breast carcinoma. I. Are inflammatory cells important? J Nucl Med. 1995;36:1854–1861.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Kubota R, Yamada S, Kubota K, Ishiwata K, Tamahashi N, Ido T. Intratumoral distribution of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in vivo: high accumulation in macrophages and granulation tissues studied by microautoradiography. J Nucl Med. 1992;33:1972–1980.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Avril N, Menzel M, Dose J, et al. Glucose metabolism of breast cancer assessed by 18F-FDG PET: histologic and immunohistochemical tissue analysis. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:9–16.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Oshida M, Uno K, Suzuki M, et al. Predicting the prognoses of breast carcinoma patients with positron emission tomography using 2-deoxy-2-fluoro[18F]-D-glucose. Cancer. 1998;82:2227–2234.[Medline]
  13. Bos R, van der Hoeven JJM, van der Wall E, et al. Biologic correlates of 18fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in human breast cancer measured by positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:379–387.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Reske SN, Grillenberger KG, Glatting G, et al. Overexpression of glucose transporter 1 and increased FDG uptake in pancreatic carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 1997;38:1344–1348.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Brown RS, Wahl RL. Overexpression of Glut-1 glucose transporter in human breast cancer: an immunohistochemical study. Cancer. 1993;72:2979–2985.[Medline]
  16. Rempel A, Mathupala SP, Griffin CA, Hawkins AL, Pedersen PL. Glucose catabolism in cancer cells: amplification of the gene encoding type II hexokinase. Cancer Res. 1996;56:2468–2471.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Caraco C, Aloj L, Chen LY, Chou JY, Eckelman WC. Cellular release of [18F]2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose as a function of the glucose-6-phosphatase enzyme system. J Biol Chem. 2000;275:18489–18494.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Torizuka T, Tamaki N, Inokuma T, et al. In vivo assessment of glucose metabolism in hepatocellular carcinoma with FDG-PET. J Nucl Med. 1995;36:1811–1817.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Aloj L, Caraco C, Jagoda E, Eckelman WC, Neumann RD. Glut-1 and hexokinase expression: relationship with 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose uptake in A431 and T47D cells in culture. Cancer Res. 1999;59:4709–4714.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Torizuka T, Zasadny KR, Recker B, Wahl RL. Untreated primary lung and breast cancers: correlation between F-18 FDG kinetic rate constants and findings of in vitro studies. Radiology. 1998;207:767–774.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Hoffmann A, Gloe T, Pohl U. Hypoxia-induced upregulation of eNOS gene expression is redox-sensitive: a comparison between hypoxia and inhibitors of cell metabolism. J Cell Physiol. 2001;188:33–44.[Medline]
  22. Pan M, Wasa M, Souba WW. Tumor necrosis factor stimulates system XAG-transport activity in human endothelium. J Surg Res. 1995;58:659–664.[Medline]
  23. Clavo AC, Brown RS, Wahl RL. Fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in human cancer cell lines is increased by hypoxia. J Nucl Med. 1995;36:1625–1632.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Burgman P, Odonoghue JA, Humm JL, Ling CC. Hypoxia-induced increase in FDG uptake in MCF7 cells. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:170–175.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Pedersen MW, Holm S, Lund EL, Hojgaard L, Kristjansen PE. Coregulation of glucose uptake and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in two small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) sublines in vivo and in vitro. Neoplasia. 2001;3:80–87.[Medline]
  26. Hanahan D, Folkman J. Patterns and emerging mechanisms of the angiogenic switch during tumorigenesis. Cell. 1996;86:353–364.[Medline]
  27. Hasan J, Byers R, Jayson GC. Intra-tumoural microvessel density in human solid tumours. Br J Cancer. 2002;86:1566–1577.[Medline]
  28. Weidner N, Semple JP, Welch WR, Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis and metastasis: correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:1–8.[Abstract]
  29. Srivastava A, Laidler P, Davies RP, Horgan K, Hughes LE. The prognostic significance of tumor vascularity in intermediate-thickness (0.76–4.0 mm thick) skin melanoma: a quantitative histologic study. Am J Pathol. 1988;133:419–423.[Abstract]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
S. Kako, K. Izutsu, Y. Ota, Y. Minatani, M. Sugaya, T. Momose, K. Ohtomo, Y. Kanda, S. Chiba, T. Motokura, et al.
FDG-PET in T-cell and NK-cell neoplasms
Ann. Onc., October 1, 2007; 18(10): 1685 - 1690.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Buck, A. K.
Right arrow Articles by Reske, S. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Buck, A. K.
Right arrow Articles by Reske, S. N.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE